The Sun. — London, England, 1810-03-29 00:00:00

.1 ion (,(1 .Daturis of the a valti t from 3 ion tV ac r, itreae d , ttaatlf I'lrr. an Wl'.6 tl,riil' ,Y•. ,d !pito' hat por" voter 4 14; in pO5 leb` WO! ci ;? rtz , s. • z .L teed ; rY. 1. ti, t 3 5 01 " t I I-04 1 i hitu -e" be " i 1 : 4tea act 05 on 0 ars 'ear ileg, e : «h ® ; rang e .; :CO" ra.tho. 0.01 tagte• oi ih: I . i)er be e rof . perti e ,of of cale l 4 .if e 110 J. 1° 4 , , • are ;'n Y ` 1.,:o r 4 etr,ll;i 10 - 13 1511' I ( 4e [ ; int! , L e ii! 'eat I. tlie4;l too :14igi; po i) Lee 0 1 ' la O f f r ver t;' d 8 rn o,,eic Ito!' t ; go t ; ' , obe - I • € O OTi table fOr Having COnsidered the subletsof debate as Muth, CS possible, •it was his opinion that if he were 'forced to Vote, ,it would be fgainst the preient question. .the , Situation ,of the country .should be considered, when 'there were hteetings and dis s cussiont on altheit every opinion of he Rouse It should not be proceeded on witk: recipitancy, and without consideration. Mr. Yorke fenlnd a new interpretatiOn of the' Bill of Bights, nor fl‘Need was be surprised, since the Hon. Member l r• Owen) was but new in that House, _that should ,be .ithritient to assert., its privileges.--- • 44 nature of a libel h a d not b e e n d u l y co n sider e d !oder its two ,heads, the matter and the man 'et this, was , a grave and serions . argument,; on gave - constitutional question, an d. every ,. particnlar, , were be attended to. He . did - neit - coliceive there qZere offensive passages by any means in the paper ; e language was . .perhalis, too strong, but the House 0 ht ,rot : to , judge, on, mean terms. He -w as far . nna defending the . -paper,' but rose to 'express. Ve doub ts h e had 'on' the subjeet. He a s ked b ne Lawy ers w h o sat before him, ought the li ,er tY, of .a subject to be injured on inuenao alone ?. the Cou rt of Kings Bench'it was not po ss ibl e I . l ° Pais judgment on sitch . a Toduditioia. He was : l acquainted with the law : - : of that House,as h e el as with th e genera l l aw o f t h e land, yet 0 ,,, t hought jydgment .should not be. passed with- t he- presenc e o f the accused - Time lea e be taken for consideration, that the un se ?flight have th e satisfaction to refleaing it,had Q ne every thing in'its poser. Can the Ri g h t H on . lientituan say it .tias . - been in the power - of the % i 945 g in so sh4t .for.c.al ? .c.. These considerations he thought were suffi- , th i - en ;.sroond fo r vot i ng to postpone t he debate , ' t ill eve •q.014,e sh ou ld !rav e opportunity of ;earning 'l ) artieular. • r • • • t r , " 21 'e t i h ceive hoW any- one possessed of the - t ense and f9rrnatio n of 'his lion. and .Learned F r i en d cou ld alnht that t he paper i n question wai tlistioaiY j b „' b el-• Although not have seleated the. , - ,"age Hunted by his'Hiari. Vriend under ,the Gal- . pas,sagY a s th e str onges t i n that .production,, still. that .• q e- was unquest i ona bl y a' lib e l on the House. , il l ` - ' o ininons, for the inference from the assertion li at Mr. Yorke, in arguing from the Bill of Rights, t:"' PonverieCt it into a Bill of Wr o n g s, by which i, M llent the' HOUse h a d b een i n d uce d to a 9, Was ' t ,;ho House had done wrong, and violated the 11: ! v ileges of the people. All seemed to agree that 013 was . highly important question. So jne in tip c t might think that the iriqulry into the apnlica fn which his *Majesty's Ministers had . made of the i lt - 4 ,.„ e t s ei. of the country a t Waldieren Was of still importance; but although he was willing, aclipit that this inquiry was of gr ea t i m p ortance , " did not believe that the House would fe e l it t o be ef , , app„ s , ti ch importance - as the investigati o n o f a c h arge Drust the m , t h at t h ey h a d b een gu i lty of a -grois : I tion of the - . law of the land. Vari ous Gentle en h ad Called on him, some in a f r i en dly, an d so n ic 144 4 hostile tone, not to - expc.se himself to the itn 1, t ltion of interpOsing the'present discussion to di- nett the public attenti: , n from the Walcheren In- Ji i - ,2"Y• For the purposes of declamation, or of cast -I),„'' ° alum on Ministeri, such an insinuation might • q- 41 - v erY convenient ;, but it was impossible that any , e could reasonably believe that the intervention of ;t 'aY before the decision of the Inquiry was a mat „°f personal importance An - the Members of 4-a!iflajesty's Government. An Hon.Gentlerpan had til l i g ,thathe (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) cal brlated upon some such circumstance in the Chapter to Accidents as that which happened to the condeMn s°l.dier in the r et r eat ; an d t h at w i th a halter about ' S . neck b e lO o k e d ar o un d for some such fortunate , rent as the present discus s io n t o avert hi s i mpen di ng k. . • In this-assertion lie could not suppose that The Gent. was serious. Vor his . part h e 'w as i s Mix-I -o" for. result of the I nq ui r y i nto t h e E x p e di t i on ' si ,The Sch e ld t as any man.' Anticipating that result t o l , l e - tlid with the most perfeCteonfidence, he looked the means of doing awaythose fals e inipres ic4s which had prev a il e d with respott to a measure, \t ', e Wisdom . , and. policy of which he was peruaded i ts ; -1 , 1 , 1 appear'. more evi'dently the MorE - the measure P,.•" was examined. His H o nou ra bl e and. Learned d' ' e nd had ,very' .justly said in conside a ring libel,. a , . ri,'"ctiori ought to be made between the matter and ner manner._ Now both - the matter:and- th e Man it of the paper in question were as li6ellous as- Iv as possible.to imagme.• lie allowed that any in allydual 'vas perfealy arliberty to canvas any act of ti, l . ho n-ty; - "but :he had no right to decry the d e -'. f r ''an of the House .of' Cominans, and to appeal' ti- 1 4 , 14 Zrar . dtettibtriti.:.ll4, ::Constituents. ..The .. 11 7 4 tier of the Alocumtni was most offensive, and • :th respect to the matter, it .was neither more nor tv4s,titan a call . by the Hon. Baronet. o n th e peop l e : r re sist the authority of Parlianient. If he could we-the proposition by a inure reference - to the og the licto.l3aronet (without saying,any- thing this argument by winch it was followed), he lii.!,,,,4ld•thew a case ot . which it would become tl t c ITO - oq hot -- TlieleffeTa l ion.,Barone.t bitgan tc~ ot qUotation i s g i ve n i n M r . Br a nd ' s Speech, in our. -t m'coiutnirj. After a few sentences the letter proceeded thus t th != ch w. thirefure . no.the.tiine to resist fio6trine up on , Mr. J ones h as b ee n sent to Nentite, as it is high t ime !! tie bY ttre all pretensio ns f o t h ose lib ert i es which were acquit. torefathers after s o many struggl es an d so many 4 eri6„,,,• • t an. :l' !le§)aternontof the Hon. Baronet, th ere f ore , be- 1, by' an allegation that the House'ot Commons h a d y 4 .1 ,,.?1' an Order of their own a g ain s t M ag niC harta. IL 4 the laWs of the land ; that personal safety was . . ;e:.reby endanger . ed, and that now was tlle'Ame,l ,O L ',' ist the doarites - tipon - which - they - h a d` sent tet'needs t o Ne wgate . . B ut, perhaps; it might be con -4,.40, that by resistance was meant 'resistance iv . Plment. What said the. succealing paraotapits ve ! Eith er the House ofC tarommons is autheriseeto dispense - ith th e law of the land or as not:" 11 -. A passage- in which it was clearly inferred, that in tek- in stance cOmplaineeof the laws_.of the land had - en. so dispensed 'with. * - 4 fr .lf the Constitution be of so delicate a texture—so weak o r j -Ine —so fragile in substance, that it to'be only spoken ternis Of admiration, and to be viewed merely as a niece. 4,,,.ltizious but unprofitable workmanship ; it Magna C harts: 1 4 1,41 the who l esome laws •of England be a dead letter i'ttt ,: .case the affirmative of the proposition may berritql. , its but if the Constitution lives, and isiappligrbo il. rt .!: end s ;. tiaincly the happiness.ef the communfq, tit e gt.seeurity of The lite, Aibeity, and.prolierty ct• e:- ! 0 i i. l " Cr,,and all the members of the sociery 4; thee rhea,- -atiVe of -the proposition can never tie • admitted cithen must we be freenien, for we Ned no better security; - no More powerful protedion for our rights and liberties ; than the laivs and Constitution. We'seek tor, and we need seek .fpfpothibg new; we ask fin no more than what our forefa 'the'rs - insisted upon as their own : we ask for no more than: what they bequeathed unto - .us; 'We ask for no i wee „t.lian what they in the Testament which some of them had sealed; and which the rest of - them were ready with. their blood, expressly-. declared to be ' - =:tbe.::3biilhright of the people of England ; namely, the iliaviw r of England. To these Laws, we . have a right to 'look with confidence for security • to these . law s th e inch- Nidual . :now imprisoned has throu ghi me• applied bar redress, in vain. Those who have imprisoned, him have refused to listen tiiiny voice, weakly expressing the strong principles of the law, the undeniable claims of this Englishman's ' birth. 'right:' Your voice rhay come with more time; may coin ,.mandgr,iter-respect.sand I am not without hope.that it may. prove irresistible, if it proclaim to this House of Commons in this same tone as the tongues ()four ancestors proclaimed to the Kings of old—' A'olatinnt legvt Anglia mulari e or in our •nwitniore clear, and not less forcible language, < The Laws . of England shall not -be changed." - . As far'as he had gone , w as t hi s the proper mode of trdating such a sUbje6f? BUf what followed tf.tirtie principles; fellow eititens, for which We arre nbw opteajding, are the same principles for which the .people of t-. nitali4 had contended fro m t h e earliest ages; and their glo: rionituteess in Which contests are now upon record in the ! great - Charters of our Rights and Liberties, and in divers other subsequent statutes of scarcely less importance, t was this same great principl e which was again attacked by Charles I. I-. in the measure of ship-money, when again -the people of Eng- .. •i land; and an uncorrupted House of Commons' renewed the contest; a contest Which ended in theimpris , nment, the trial; the. condemnation; and the execution of that ill.advised King. - 'file self-Same principle, it was that was so daringly violated by his son, fames 1 1 - , And again, towards the conclusion of the same paragraph, " Volumes have been written by foreigners, as well as by our own countrymen, in praise of that . part of our law,ethielt: ; in 3o admirable a manlier provides for our personal safety against any attacks of men in power. This has indeed been' in all ages the pride of our country; and it is the maintenance . of this . principle which enabled us ro escape that bondage in `i which all the Staresand Kingdoms in Europe, were enthrall.. • ed, by abandoning and yielding ft up; and we may be owned, 'that if,,sve now abandon it,the bright day of'L-ngland's gtoiy . 1 will set in the night of her disgrace." Could 'any thing be more distinai than the mode , of resistance here recommended - bY' ronet.to the decision of .the •House of Commons ?- . Was it not evident that lie wished the. people of 'England to resist in the same manner as they did in the instances WhiCh he hadluoted ? 'But to set this matter in • a clearer light, the Hon. Baronet pro -leecled " But I would fain believe that such is not to be our fate, One forefathers made 'stern grim. v isaged Prerogative hide his • head ; they broke in pieces his sharp and massy sword. •Anti shall we, • their sons, be afraid to enter (the lists with uncle. fined Privilege assuming the powers of Prerogative ?" • Was it possible, after hearing these passages, that any one could refuse assent to .his prOptisition, that tho-Hon. -Baronet had called on his con4tituents td"' , resist the doctrine by which Mr.-Jones had been committed by the House of Commons, as the only mOde by which they could preserve their liberties ; that he shewed Ahern how their forefathers had fought for those liberties, and that he then asked them- if they were now afraid-to enter the lists in a similar contest ? In a succeeding paragraph the i Hon. Baronet observed, " That a power. such as this should exist in any country it is lamentable to be obliged to believe ; but that it should be suffered to exist, and that its existence should be openly and 1 even boastfully avowed in a Country whose chielglory has been its free Constitution of Government, is something too lIIVIISUOUS to be believed if the proof were not before your i eyes." The Hon. Baronet concluded by telling his Con . stituents. " The argument by which I have endeavoured to con_! vince the Gentlemen of the House of Cornmoris that their acts in the case of Mr. Jones were illegal, I shall now lay before you in a more full and connected way than it could possibly be done by. the Parliamentary Reporters, and in doing ; this I shall do all that now remains- in my power towards the correC{ion of this, as I deem it, most enormous. abuse of power, and most dangerous of all encroachments upon the rights and liberties of Engli.hinen." • ' He put it to the House, whether any thing could have been written to Englishmen more calculated to' excite their resistance to the authnrity of Parliatnent, and to bring the charaEiter of.that HouSe into dis respe& and contumely ? Could any thing hare been written that bore more - completely the charaitier of .Ittlibel on the rights and privilees 'of the House of ' Commons ? Could his Hon. and Lout - led Friend; after his attention had been. thus direded to those passages, have any doubts on the subjea ? If he had, h.; (the Chancellor of the•Excheqber) was per waded that an adjournment of the discussion for a week,. or fur any+mger peri.)4 "would not re mo ve them' With resped •to the objetlionable passages in the " Argument;' they had so ireq7ently been quoted in the course of the debate, that he would not enter into them minutely. The HouSe were in possession of passages in which the . Hon. - Baronet 'distinctly stated, that the proceOings of the House of 'Commons were s)sLematically against the laws, and in complete subversion of the Coustitution of the country. Some of . the Hon. Gentletnett who had ,Spoken had no doubt that the paper Was a libel, but • wished to know s.nuething- about .the law ; others did not dispute the law, • but wished to know something about the libel. He was anxi - - ous - to satisfy both parties. As to the - fin% he trusted, that what he had 'already stated was.suf ficient ;. and with respell • to the libel, if a public refledion on the proceedings of that House was 'not a libel, he did not know what . was. Let tire .House consider the following passage in the " Ar gument ;" " They (the House of Commons) have become the pro: prietorS, by Burgage •tenure, of the whole representation; and in that capacity are,inliated with their high,blown fanci ful ideas of Majesty, and tricked out in the trappings of Royalty, think privilege and protectidn beneath then - dignity, assume the sword of. prerogative,, and "lord it etpially over the King and the People." His Honourable and Learned declared that 'he did not understand thiS, and thcre(bre that it could not be libellotis. This much however 'was perfealy intelligible, that it 'declared the House of -. Commons had assumed a power which by th e Con ,Stitution it was not all owe d to possess. The main busines4 of the ," Argument" was to .prove that the House had not a right to 'conitUit a stranger_ for a Breaeh of Privilege ; for the Honourable I.3,troaet, admitted that they had a right to coturnit a Alember, for such offence. " Now this . was a case of doubt, on which. the Honourable Baronet hada right to argue as 'fully a s h e c h o s e i n the Hou:;e; , be hoved him to take care iii what Man/it:The spoke.er wrote on the subjeti. It . did not follow' that -that which it was lawful to say'in the .House, before decision, it was lawful to say out of the . House, after aidecisibn; 'and still less lawful was it to re-, cotnmend a resistance to that decision. Supposing that he considered the conduet:oi . the House• in the case of.Mr..Gale'Jnnes as illegal, the Honourable. „Baronet had a right t o en d eavour . , t o in d uce the }Luse lo rescind their proce4ilgs ; but when he failed in that 'attempt, be had no right to call UpOn the people to r es i st t h e i r aut h or i ty. He would now address himself to remove any doubts with reined to the laW of the. case. The right of the .H ()use to commit 'strangers could be traced as far back its the reign of Queen Elizabeth, - in which Mr. - Hall and • 'Mr. Trolope were so committed (on further consi .deratiOn, the Chancellor of the ExChequer obserf;. ed, that Mr. Hall was a Member, not a stranger). : - Selden had decidedly asserted. that privilege, Toe reign of Charles I. -comprised an accumulated mass of authorities to that pUrpose. In one particular in stance, the - I<entish Petition, a Committee resolVed, , that to deny the right of the House of-Commons to commit strangers was a.gross' violation of tltei4, rights and privileges. Between the years 1701 and . 171.4; there were 'no 'less than thirty instances of commitments. ;In the cases of Oliver sand i -‘ Ciosbie, the'Court,of Common Pleas.and the Court... ; of ,Exchequer both decreed that the House of Com mons had 'a rip, - htlo commit astranger for a breach - Of privilege. There was also the authority .of the Court of King's Bench for the existence °fan' ana-. logous privilege in the House of Lords. Lord Kenyon observed, on a motion of Habeas Corpus, - -i to bring up the'body of Mr. Flower, who had been committed by ilte.House of Lords, ." that if ever:a - time should come when faC-tious men would at tempt to Overturn the Governnied, they would begin by calummating the Courts of Justice and both Houses of Parliament." , ---!`• I solemnly call on the House,'.' added the Right Honourable Gentleman, ." to con skier Whethe r th at tim e h as not arrived."—Where Would be- the - impartiality of the Howie ; if .after committing Mr. Jones for a breach: of.privdege, they should treat a Member - who,. with a better kdowledge of those privileges, bad violated them, with more indulgenCe? If they adjourned:that on which it.was impossible to have any doubt, he did not conc,eiVe that they would support their 'dignity or evince their impartiality and justice. The House was called upon by 'an imperious duty. If they hesitatectio‘pronounce that againsr the Honourable Baronetwhich they' had not hesitated to pronounce against a less distinguished offender, they tvould sink low indeed in the public estimation. Let the offenCes . of the two individuals be compared. GtosSly' Libellous as the proceeding. of ,Mr.- ,Gale Jones had been, • was trifling. and r conteMptible, compared'-with that of the Honourable . Baronet. If the House; from an apprehension of 'doing that - which the 'HOnoUrable Baronet might perhaps wish, and in 'which he might perhaps triumph, were to abstain , frOni doing their duty, -they would . indeed atford him cause of triumph, and would indeed de-' serve to 'be triumphed over and trod upon. •In as serting- their own rights, they .were 'asserting the rights of the people of England. The only way to maintain their dignity, was to do their duty—to do it temperately—but to do it firmly and impartially. It appi,ared to him that the House could not hesi't , ' tate in concurring in the. motion - sof his Hon. Friend, and he was persuaded that they would not hesitate in doing so. s LordiFoiKsToki hoped 'the debte would . be ad journed, and that the House would not go to the question hastily and prematurely.. His Honourable and. Learned Friend had doubts on the subject ; ; were those .r doutitt not to 'be respeCted-? There were, others' alsb who experienced considerable_dtftidulty. Re briefly adverted to the precedents cited by the night Hon. Gentleman who had just sat:down, and contended that they were not in point: The Right Hon. Gentleman had repeated an observation of Lord Kenyon's on the danger to be apprehended from calumniating the Houses of P.rliarnent. He. really, did not expel to hear this from the Ilight kick nourahle Gentleman, after what had passed .in the two last,Sessions of Parliament. .1. he HOUSP.rnight prevent the people from speaking, but they could not prevent them from thinking; arid When the people saw their . Ministers of State accused of vio lations of the Constitution, and of the privileges Of Parliament, and then saw that .those individuals were permitted by a majority of the House of Commons to - escape with impunity, their thoughts might easily be conceived.. The Right. Hon. Gentleman had laid great stress upon the word " resist," . but if ; he. would-look at another part, of the letter he would thetrelind the word " resist" and the word "legal" coupled . together in such a manner as to render it_ evident to every impartial mind, that it was legal resistance only that his Hon. Friend meant to re commend. Mr: CROXER and Mr. CURWEN explained. Mr. ADAM declared that no, man -. was more at tached - to the 'rights and privileges of that House than himself, but he -thought the_ present question ought to be decided only after full deliberation, and he Was therefore of opinion that it ought to be adjourned. 7 No such casehati occurred for twenty seven years, and the instance which then took place (the case of Major Scott) by no means involved such. `important consideratimis as the present and yet-af ter the first motion; the further: consideration of it .had been deferred for a week. He really had not had time to think on ihe subjea, ol- IO consult the necessary law authorities, points in which thellight . Hon. Gentleman enjoyed much greater facilities.— ne Was anxious to have an opportunity of prepar ing himself to refute the assertions of •the Hon. Ba ,rOnet,''and to prove- that the= privilege which the House possessed of commitment, was adherent in ttie law of the land: He thought he could under take to shew that the cases gulled •by the Hon. Ba ronct'we.re most of them' adverse rather then fa vourable to the Hon. Baronet's position. .On re turning frourthe House of Commons that tnOrning at t liree o'clock he had proceeded to read on .the-sub je6l; and he found •that. Lord Chief Justice Grey, and Lcrd Chief Juitice H o lt' d ec l a r e d th at t h e Ho use , of,Commons possessed the right of commitment for a breech of privilege. He was anxious-to: be al-. fps ed further time. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had many reasons for thinking that the discussion ought not to be, post pone Fl .: He retraced the proceedings on the subjecil, and contended that if an adjourninent took place, it ':might, perhaps be attriboted to the influence;of Mo tives, to the imput a ti on of whichthe House on lit never to expose theniselves. He could not under. stand the grounds on which the Honourable and Learned Member who had just spoken - wished for an adjeurnment. The question had been treated as if it were a nevi point, and as if t he - House iu many former instances, and recently, in the case of Mr. G . ale Jones; had not deternained it; for let it be recolleat'..d, that the argument of the Hob.-BaronA ••••f • I • - • was ag" airiM the power of the House to ecnimit strangers; lie achnitting that they had the power td tomnili Methberi. Th e Ho use; therefore; would net, have committed Mr. Gale Jones,.Jones,.had net thei r been folly Satisfied of th e i r p ower to do . so: If hit lion. and Learned Ifriend was not so satisfied, why liad'he not attetiskd the motion for the Como-tit went Of Mr. Jones sAnd farther, when the Hon. Bari Made a motion for,the discharge of Mr. Jones; why had not his Learned Friend then attended if tie en.: tertained any doubts ? He had abundant opportUni,' ty to consult authorities, for the Hon. Baronet had given a week's notice of his motion: The gees - - tion howeVer had been discussed in a full House on this scale grouridnot whether the Houie had A _right to notnniit Mr. Jones in the first instance, but whether his having expressed his contritien at thd Bar might entitle him to be discharged without •petition. The question at present before the House was- s —hot whether the House was vested with the light of cominitmetst s for that was fully establie!,eds but whether-'the Paper of the Hon. Baronet was n' libel or not ?:If any , doubts could possibly eXist on _thatl . subject, he should' be perfealy dispoSe.d to con... cur in the adjoin - nal:sot of the' discussion ; btu it appeared to burl that it-Was o n ly necessary to read' the Paper, ill older to be convinced that it was a libel, and a gross - violation of - the privileges of the House. - • . , Mr. BATHURST observed; that 'vhen the hosities3 was before ihe House du the precettog day, he was of, opinion, from the nature of the Pains- uhd, discussion, that it would be prefera.ble the cons;: aeration- of the'question should be pststponed to - a future day. He was still. of - the' same opinion; hi. which he was not guided by the same qinoVeSWhisli had, influenced the opinions of many. Hon. Gentles Men. He did not think that either with - reference: toktendeiness to the object who I,V2s the subject of _ the discussion,,Or - from any apprehensioo pt the con sequence of the result, should tbe House be induced to pause. On the grand principle of _giving ,the Paper a full and candid perusal, Fo . as that the House might coine to a just decision, and not. this) w discredit on.the debates, would he agree to.the adjourtiment: With respect to the particular parts of Paper, vii whichmuch,s4tference of opinion prevailed, , - sli m e Gen:lemen peSriting out passages which they cleein; , ed libellous, lie thought it was not a fair line of ,afs gument to draw s u c h an inference, Istcause the Pber should be taken together. On .the other hand it had been urged, that it the House- dial not consent to delay, the i uople Might tie 'excited to discontent,' Without entering into an 'examination ot-these topics, he thought it would be better on a question of a doubtful nature not to precipitate the • -Hi7use. Between, these difficulties he would w slt to steer a prudent course, and though be would not go the length of the Amendment, yet he was of - opinion at least the discussion should be post , 'toned till to-morrow. • Mr. °wets explained. - _ •It was then proposed by Mr. BA/it:Sri, to move an Amendment to _his Moti on ;. b ut. the Speaker haVing intimated to the Hon. Member, that he could not in point of torn), the Amendment was propos d by another Hon. Member, io effect following :—" That • a great question being - depending ,before the House ; respeaing the. Expedition to Walcheren ; which so fully occupies and, engages its'attention, it is fit that the consideration of the Motion now under discussion rcipe6ting the rights and privileges of the House be adjourned till to-morrow se'dnight." The Hon. Member who. proposed . this Amend- Ment asserted,. that ther e h a d b een a meeting at the house of the Right HO n . G ent l eman . ( Mr. P,.rceval) to prepare thes e R eso l ut i ons, at which . the Mover and S4conder were present, and consequently they were Treasury manufitaure. Mr. LETHBAIDO•Ii, the Mover, immediately arose to utter the monosyllable ‘`, No !" to the, Right I-lon. Gentleman's assertion ; and further said the Hon. Gentleman—"l. dedlare upon my honour, that the Reiolutions which I had the honour of mov ing are not-of Treasury manufaeture !" The same Hon. Member observed, there was 9n understanding upon, the subject, for the-Seconder, as he.was informed, was there. -Mr. BLAGHFORD, the Seconder, arose, and de nied the assertion. . . . Mr. IL DUNDAS would n o t d e t a i n the Rouse but a short time. He vas. not surprised the Hon.'Gen ,tleman who brought for Ward the .motion of adjour intent should have said that the question was one cf great importance. Although he should object to the adjournatent, his objections were much stronger to the Ainendtnent now proposed, With respect to the paper - underdiscussion, his objections to it were not s o much to the matter as to the manner in which the Hon. Baronet had chosen to dißcuss the suhjeet....., The pirriple oestion, for the House to deciFle was, Whether the Hon; Baronet had discussed it in such a mode, and in such terms, as Were not an infringe ment on ; the privi)eges. of this House. It had been said the resolutions were Treasury manufacture ; he could assure t*. Hon,. Member who made, the asser tion that the fact was not so. • • Mr. WILELERFORCE was anxious to deliver his sentiments. There was :no man more fervently convinced than himself. of tLie necessity that not only the privileges of Parliament,: but that the privileges of the . People of England-should maintained.--, •:With that opinion on ,his, mind, he could not .cou sent to 'come to a haSty decision on the question, unless it was wished that thelneaning of this Itnisi: should be misconstrued by the-peoph. This was Just the'cao in which of all others the Etottse shou!d as if the'Mernbers were all of one mind, There was no ilnike&ling---so , dangerous -as _that i.vhich should eff ort! to the.people through the means of an eije: X; ',as if the House ilraS actin contrary to Abet:- j4st'!'fights. , It . was, the connedion of thii, House With. the People that co s nstittqed its. greatest strength; and for these reasons he would wish to appear as ailing with temperance and moderation.— When Gentlemen expressed a wish for delay, and :stated as the'ground for that wish, that they were not prepared to, come to an honest conclusion, w th. out further examination of the paper—i,vhen it should be known to the Public, that a :Learned Gen tleman,. (Sir Samuel.,Romiily) who haddeNvered A most constitutional speech-, and Who, froni his great legal knowledge,' and; his being. accustomed to re= searcheSi tipop questions ofconstittition a l privilege, bad detlarkhhat he Wished for time--when o:her GentieOleti'eipyessed similar wishes, surely it would Lot •be - toillmueh to let the people see that at le )!ii the House desirous to be 13/120i010113* Wll-41 9iOn. ed.-- make Mind t ab= f Rates igfor Zno: Dub t, , Nouldi NOUICI t lv as MO '1)(014 tiii4 wbur; y. And_ eLttle ditto f led' at he was a 3e he.: A Iwo- le un- Le jtls.- tt)ey ,011111:, C4lZil"' atuu:-d -of ttie On ration` viih•ed ' ~~,►ill3~' :vS 1)_>~ ~~- :c: gi,t 13 C sOnic it iiO4, T(:‘lsop 0 .. \t,\..